Imagining Niklas Luhmann as a “change manager”: scrum as an example of a closed system for the self-organized stabilization of corporate agility

Abstract

Purpose

Systems theory is frequently discussed. The aim of the contribution is to elaborate what is to be advised with the idea of closed systems regarding change management.

Design/methodology/approach

This paper follows Niklas Luhmann and his so-called “autopoietic turn.” It provides a profound theoretic basis, from which the needs and requirements of the post-heroic management emerge. The implications of this specific approach to change management are demonstrated by means of the contemporary example of scrum. The applied method is literature review.

Findings

This contribution seeks to understand the relevance of closed systems within change management. Especially, the meaning of indirect strategies of control as a requirement for change management will be shown. That means Luhmann emphasizes the pessimism of traditional change management. The findings emphasize the meaning of self-organizing systems predicating by means of observation, which configurates corporate agility.

Research limitations/implications

Systems theory often suffers from lack of empirical evidence, as systems are multi-complex. As an alternative, in this study, a literature-based discussion of the contemporary agile project management technique “scrum” is used.

Practical implications

The meaning of power in management shifts from formal to informal or soft power, e.g. the ability to promote self-binding processes. Thus, closed systems emphasize the need to look for alternatives for change management.

Originality/value

Characterizing Luhmann as a hidden champion of contemporary management as modern management tools like hackathons or crowdsourcing also benefit from closed systems.

Citation

Lies, J. (2020), "Imagining Niklas Luhmann as a “change manager”: scrum as an example of a closed system for the self-organized stabilization of corporate agility", Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 33 No. 7, pp. 1417-1429. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-11-2019-0355